Thoughts on Fourth Edition

In the Babylon 5 universe, the Vorlons asked "Who are you?" while the Shadows asked "What do you want?" Those questions defined who they were.

In a role-playing game, the game master is defined by the question, "What do you do?" That phrase is the trigger for the role-playing experience. In it's purest and more unrefined state, that tells the player it's his or her turn to add to the story. It is the moment of infinite potential, the moment when the escapism can take over. The closer any set of role-playing game rules allows a group to come to this ideal--or, more accurately, the less a set of rules intrudes into this potential--the more engaging the experience becomes.

In previous editions of D&D, it has never been quite that limitless, but the potential for cleverness and creativity was always there. You could always find a new way to use a spell, or a way to turn the environment to your advantage, or choose a moment to backstab your buddies.

Now, I have not had a chance to play 4th Edition D&D yet, but I have the books and I've been studying them for a few weeks now. I think they are a fine evolution of the system, a logical improvement over 3.5, and an elegant way to free D&D from its legacy issues.

My main concern is that, when the DM asks you "What do you do?", your response is, "Well, as an Nth level Defender, my function is to do this, so I pick one of my X number of exploits and do my job." And then, after the encounter, the DM says, "Well, it is my job to give you Y amount of reward." In short, your options in any combat situation seem pretty pre-defined. Given robotic arms to roll dice and move minis, compters could calculate D&D now, with humans becoming superfluous. Non-combat situations are glossed over as just the boring time between encounters. I allow that the game may be different in practice, but the books do a great job of making it seem very pre-determined and limiting.

The other problem I have is that the game isn't done. I can understand the purely mechanical problems now, given that every class description is a book sub-chapter with a 100+ item a la carte menu of class abilities attached. But still, eight classes is thin, and even though those menus seem huge, they are still clearly incomplete. You are given only 2-5 choices to make per level, and often the choices are illusions; for the Warlock, there may be 7-8 spells to pick from at any given level, but only 1 or 2 are for your pact; for the Fighter, you want to pick that exploit that fits your chosen weapon. The book with the Bard, Druid, Barbarian, Monk, and other missing classes is not due for another year, but it really needs to be out this fall.

I love the new system, I love that Warlord, I love the Monster Manual. I love the death of alignments (though its hamstrung remians seem silly). I am happy to be rid of fire-and-forget wizards and the Great Wheel cosmology. This seems like an easier game to play and to run. I just think it has taken a step away from a role-playing game and too far into a chatty board game.